Pelle Kahr Nilsson, Ulrik Knap, Rasa Laurinaviciene, Sebastian Vigand Svendsen, Tine Vestergaard
{"title":"Comparative Study of CO<sub>2</sub> Laser and Curettage-Electrodesiccation for Superficial Basal Cell Carcinoma Treatment: A Focus on Cosmetic Results.","authors":"Pelle Kahr Nilsson, Ulrik Knap, Rasa Laurinaviciene, Sebastian Vigand Svendsen, Tine Vestergaard","doi":"10.5826/dpc.1503a5368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common type of skin cancer worldwide, and the incidence is rising. While surgical excision remains the gold standard, it can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. Therefore, there is a growing need for simpler and more cost-effective treatment options for low-risk tumors.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study compared the scar quality and the recurrence rate from continuous wave CO<sub>2</sub> laser and curettage and electrodesiccation treatments. Scar quality and the recurrence rate from the treatments were assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-blind randomized prospective interventional trial was conducted at Odense University Hospital, Denmark, from 2017 to 2023. Patients with histologically confirmed superficial BCC were randomized 1:1 to Curettage-Electrodesiccation (CE) or continuous wave CO<sub>2</sub> (CW CO<sub>2</sub>) laser treatment. Scar quality was assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and a modified visual-only scale (VSAS). Recurrence within one year was a secondary outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two patients were treated for 32 tumors: 17 with CE and 15 with CO<sub>2</sub> laser. There was no significant difference in scar quality or recurrence rate between the CE and CO<sub>2</sub> laser groups (PSAS: P = 0.422; OSAS: P = 0.747; VSAS: P = 0.522). After one year, neither group showed tumor recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CO<sub>2</sub> laser used in continuous wave setting offers a treatment for superficial BCCs with cosmetic outcomes and recurrence rates comparable to CE. However, a larger patient sample and longer follow-up are needed for definitive conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":11168,"journal":{"name":"Dermatology practical & conceptual","volume":"15 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12339049/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dermatology practical & conceptual","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5826/dpc.1503a5368","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common type of skin cancer worldwide, and the incidence is rising. While surgical excision remains the gold standard, it can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. Therefore, there is a growing need for simpler and more cost-effective treatment options for low-risk tumors.
Objectives: This study compared the scar quality and the recurrence rate from continuous wave CO2 laser and curettage and electrodesiccation treatments. Scar quality and the recurrence rate from the treatments were assessed.
Methods: A single-blind randomized prospective interventional trial was conducted at Odense University Hospital, Denmark, from 2017 to 2023. Patients with histologically confirmed superficial BCC were randomized 1:1 to Curettage-Electrodesiccation (CE) or continuous wave CO2 (CW CO2) laser treatment. Scar quality was assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and a modified visual-only scale (VSAS). Recurrence within one year was a secondary outcome.
Results: Thirty-two patients were treated for 32 tumors: 17 with CE and 15 with CO2 laser. There was no significant difference in scar quality or recurrence rate between the CE and CO2 laser groups (PSAS: P = 0.422; OSAS: P = 0.747; VSAS: P = 0.522). After one year, neither group showed tumor recurrence.
Conclusion: CO2 laser used in continuous wave setting offers a treatment for superficial BCCs with cosmetic outcomes and recurrence rates comparable to CE. However, a larger patient sample and longer follow-up are needed for definitive conclusions.
基底细胞癌(BCC)是世界范围内最常见的皮肤癌类型,发病率呈上升趋势。虽然手术切除仍然是金标准,但它可能耗时且资源密集。因此,对于低风险肿瘤,越来越需要更简单、更具成本效益的治疗方案。目的:比较连续波CO2激光与刮除和电干燥治疗的疤痕质量和复发率。评估治疗后瘢痕质量及复发率。方法:2017 - 2023年在丹麦欧登塞大学医院进行单盲随机前瞻性介入试验。组织学证实的浅表BCC患者按1:1随机分为刮除-电干燥(CE)或连续波CO2 (CW CO2)激光治疗。使用患者和观察者疤痕评估量表(POSAS)和改进的视觉评定量表(VSAS)评估疤痕质量。一年内复发是次要结果。结果:32例患者共32个肿瘤,其中CE治疗17例,CO2激光治疗15例。CE和CO2激光组在疤痕质量和复发率方面无显著差异(PSAS: P = 0.422;Osas: p = 0.747;vs: p = 0.522)。一年后,两组均未出现肿瘤复发。结论:CO2激光连续波治疗浅表bcc,其美容效果和复发率与CE相当。然而,需要更大的患者样本和更长的随访时间才能得出明确的结论。